[quote]beebuddy wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Speaking of Education:
Teachers unions need to be restructured. The inability to hire new good teachers and the inability to fire bad ones is mind boggling. That being said, teachers need the union…there’s a bit too many parents ready to sue, and school boards ready to cough let go of teachers rather than deal with shitty parents.
It’s too difficult to hire teachers. If a Lawyer or PhD wants to donate a year or two to a failing school, they shouldn’t be forced to “get certified” before they can get insurance and the like.
It’s too difficult to fire bad teachers Tenure has to be rethought.
I support vouchers, but it’s not the panacea that some here seem to think it is. Milwaukee public schools is one of the shittier districts in the nation, yet they’ve had vouchers since 1990. Wiki them for a good read.
It’s too difficult to fire bad administrators. As Irish has been suggesting, the admin plays a huge role (and eats up way too much money IMO).
Too much focus on test results. While there needs to be standards, the focus on test results will lead to “teaching to the test.”
In Japan (where these ideas came from) Two years ago there were mass suicides, as teacher, principles, etc were found to have purposefully excluded non-tested subject from the curriculum (history was perhaps the most outrageous).
I was just listening to the bit today with Michelle Rhee on NPR, and I have to say I am impressed. Did you hear this?[/quote]
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Most of them stay in Spain because it is more lenient on immigrants at this point than other EU destinations.And of course one could also say that the main driver for the largest portion of immigration to the U.S. is also geographical proximity(Mexico).
That of course,as you well know,was not the point of my post,was it?
It was a rebuttal to the line :
“Funny, it is the only country in the world where people risk death to get here everyday.”
Which is obviously not the case,is it?
Edited for clarity
[/quote]
I guess you know more than the article you referenced, which is I pulled the italicized part of my post, and which clearly states that the refugees are headed toward Europe, not exclusively Spain.
It’s it rather hypocritical of the Euro-trash to be pointing their fingers at our immigration policies, when they won’t even let refugees have a place to go.
It is also stupidity to think that our immigration is what it is because of Mexico. You have evidently never been to a donut shop in the DFW area. We have shit tons of immigrants from Asia - particularly the pacific rim.
What in the fuck does Mexico have to do with South Koreans migrating in droves to the US?
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Speaking of Education:
Teachers unions need to be restructured. The inability to hire new good teachers and the inability to fire bad ones is mind boggling. That being said, teachers need the union…there’s a bit too many parents ready to sue, and school boards ready to cough let go of teachers rather than deal with shitty parents.
teachers don’t need the union. some don’t belong to the union now. they should have the choice.
It’s too difficult to hire teachers. If a Lawyer or PhD wants to donate a year or two to a failing school, they shouldn’t be forced to “get certified” before they can get insurance and the like.
Certifications should be optional. Some parents may feel more confortable with a certification. Requirement for certifications in any industry screws the consumer. It’s the certification body’s way of controlling supply and thus controlling price.
It’s too difficult to fire bad teachers Tenure has to be rethought.
Yep.
[/quote]
agreed
Your points are sound, it’s difficult to make a quality policy on vouchers, and we have to be careful to administer them correctly. Milwaukee has had vouchers for almost 20 years.
They’ve all sorts of charter schools and vouchers can be used for private schools (I’d have to look to see what exactly, if any, the restrictions are).
Some points on the side of the private/charter school though.
If the school has an admittance test, it should be allowed to keep this test. It does no one any good to have a college prep high school filled with kids who have not been brought up to those standards yet.
Schools have to be allowed to cap enrollment, and have to be able to give preference for admittance to their “primary” students first.
In Milwaukee, as you might expect, some private and charter schools are filled to the brim because they’re so successful. If they are forced to expand enrollment, I believe quality might diminish. Part of being a good school is being of a particular size. Most of the time, smaller schools work better (to a point of course).
When I was a much younger man, I donated some time to Marva Collins (elementary and middle) school. The school was a charter school located in a “troubled neighborhood” but had amazing results with some of the most difficult kids.
With the results this school was getting, the waiting list to get into the school was literally larger than the entire enrollment for the school. If this type of school was forced to expand to quickly, quality would greatly diminish.
I agree, that tests need to be changed to be more inclusive of all the skills students need. We should also look at testing methods that go beyond “standardized tests.”
Writing, for example, is an important skill to have but cannot be measured by filling in dots on an answer sheet. When I say that there is too much focus on tests, I am mostly concerned about the quality and style of the tests themselves.
dhickey, sounds like we agree on just about everything regarding education.
You obviously hate this country. Funny, it is the only country in the world where people risk death to get here everyday. In case you need to be reminded, there are no walls keeping you here - so don’t let the door hit you…
HAHA! Because I don’t agree with our foreign policy? Fuck yourself grandpa, you have no idea.[/quote]
To disagree is one thing, to think America is somehow screwing the world is quite another.
Grandpa? Common, I am sure you can come up with a better insult than that. Go ahead, give me your best shot.
If the school has an admittance test, it should be allowed to keep this test. It does no one any good to have a college prep high school filled with kids who have not been brought up to those standards yet.
Schools have to be allowed to cap enrollment, and have to be able to give preference for admittance to their “primary” students first.
In Milwaukee, as you might expect, some private and charter schools are filled to the brim because they’re so successful. If they are forced to expand enrollment, I believe quality might diminish.
Part of being a good school is being of a particular size. Most of the time, smaller schools work better (to a point of course).
[/quote]
Schools should be able to set whatever standards or class sizes they wish. Since they are not recieving the funding directly, but as a function of the student enrollment, this should not negatively effect anyone.
There will be plenty of schools that will want that money regardless of the students performance. Taking below average students and helping them excel would also be a competitive advantage that would be advertised.
Also, if certain schools reject or expel students based on their chosen standards, parents are more likely to take an interest in how their children are performing.
You made a lot of good points. But I still support vouchers. The reasons are simple, 1) Every kid (and parent) deserves a chance. 2) I don’t think society can replace or make up for bad parenting.
Let me explain. If parents are allowed to have their kids change schools, yes, the “good kids” (i.e. kids with parents who give a fuck) will pull out of bad schools. This will not be good for bad schools, but it will be good for those kids. Those kids will, in turn, have a chance. Good kids can be crushed by bad schools.
IMO, most of the “bad kids” come from bad parents. Teachers can make a difference for those kids, but cannot replace parents. If a parent is willing to jump through the hoops to get their child a quality education, they should be allowed to do so. We have to give them opportunities to succeed.
At the school I volunteered at above, all the parents desperately wanted their kids to have an education (normally an education much greater than their own).
From what I saw, these parents worked exceptionally hard to get their kids to go to school, do well, and succeed. I helped out in the after school program, often these parents couldn’t pick up their kids until much later at night because they were both working.
Also some of them were driving or busing great distances so that their kids could go to this school. Now, without vouchers, this school might not exist (and wouldn’t in the way it did).
To argue that a child shouldn’t be able to attend this school because they live “out of the district” or in a different troubled neighborhood in Milwaukee, is unfair to the parents and especially the children.
If the school has an admittance test, it should be allowed to keep this test. It does no one any good to have a college prep high school filled with kids who have not been brought up to those standards yet.
Schools have to be allowed to cap enrollment, and have to be able to give preference for admittance to their “primary” students first. In Milwaukee, as you might expect, some private and charter schools are filled to the brim because they’re so successful.
If they are forced to expand enrollment, I believe quality might diminish. Part of being a good school is being of a particular size. Most of the time, smaller schools work better (to a point of course).
Schools should be able to set whatever standards or class sizes they wish. Since they are not recieving the funding directly, but as a function of the student enrollment, this should not negatively effect anyone.
There will be plenty of schools that will want that money regardless of the students performance. Taking below average students and helping them excel would also be a competitive advantage that would be advertised.
Also, if certain schools reject or expel students based on their chosen standards, parents are more likely to take an interest in how their children are performing.
[/quote]
Yeah, you’re right, I was just thinking aloud about some of the things that policy makers have to keep in mind. When vouchers are implemented, droves of kids will want school X, there’ll be a lot of political pressure for school X to let more kids in, change standards, etc. Just another thing to think about.
Vouchers are a good idea, but no panacea. If you’re a large advocate of vouchers, I’d recommend looking into MPS and seeing what their experience has been.
You made a lot of good points. But I still support vouchers. The reasons are simple, 1) Every kid (and parent) deserves a chance. 2) I don’t think society can replace or make up for bad parenting.
Let me explain. If parents are allowed to have their kids change schools, yes, the “good kids” (i.e. kids with parents who give a fuck) will pull out of bad schools.
This will not be good for bad schools, but it will be good for those kids. Those kids will, in turn, have a chance. Good kids can be crushed by bad schools.
IMO, most of the “bad kids” come from bad parents. Teachers can make a difference for those kids, but cannot replace parents. If a parent is willing to jump through the hoops to get their child a quality education, they should be allowed to do so. We have to give them opportunities to succeed.
At the school I volunteered at above, all the parents desperately wanted their kids to have an education (normally an education much greater than their own).
From what I saw, these parents worked exceptionally hard to get their kids to go to school, do well, and succeed. I helped out in the after school program, often these parents couldn’t pick up their kids until much later at night because they were both working.
Also some of them were driving or busing great distances so that their kids could go to this school. Now, without vouchers, this school might not exist (and wouldn’t in the way it did).
To argue that a child shouldn’t be able to attend this school because they live “out of the district” or in a different troubled neighborhood in Milwaukee, is unfair to the parents and especially the children. [/quote]
We can’t forget that competition will compell “bad” schools to get better.
[quote]orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
orion wrote:
There are Americans in Mexico and the Mexicans shelled their cities?
No, but they will arrest Americans and throw them in prison for no reason.
Really? Why?
Official politics or just corrupt police?
[/quote]
“Officially”, we are friends. In reality - they are as corrupt a government as can possibly be imagined. Politicians are more than happy to rent their power to the highest bidder.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
orion wrote:
There are Americans in Mexico and the Mexicans shelled their cities?
No, but they will arrest Americans and throw them in prison for no reason.
Really? Why?
Official politics or just corrupt police?
“Officially”, we are friends. In reality - they are as corrupt a government as can possibly be imagined. Politicians are more than happy to rent their power to the highest bidder.
[/quote]
That sounds like business as usual. Why would they arrest Americans? Someone has to buy their dope, steroids and hire their callgirls?
If I bought a politician I would want him to be nice to my customers, wouldn´t I?